linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v12 2/5] fs/proc/task_mmu: Implement IOCTL to get and optionally clear info about PTEs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 7 Apr 2023 12:04:03 +0200
From:   Michał Mirosław <emmir@...gle.com>
To:     Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>
Cc:     Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andrei Vagin <avagin@...il.com>,
        Danylo Mocherniuk <mdanylo@...gle.com>,
        Paul Gofman <pgofman@...eweavers.com>,
        Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
        Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        "Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
        Yun Zhou <yun.zhou@...driver.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        Alex Sierra <alex.sierra@....com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
        Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
        "Gustavo A . R . Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, kernel@...labora.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 2/5] fs/proc/task_mmu: Implement IOCTL to get and
 optionally clear info about PTEs

On Fri, 7 Apr 2023 at 11:35, Muhammad Usama Anjum
<usama.anjum@...labora.com> wrote:
> On 4/7/23 12:23 PM, Michał Mirosław wrote:
> > On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 at 23:12, Muhammad Usama Anjum
> > <usama.anjum@...labora.com> wrote:
> >> On 4/7/23 1:12 AM, Michał Mirosław wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 at 09:40, Muhammad Usama Anjum
> >>> <usama.anjum@...labora.com> wrote:
> >>> [...]
> >>>> --- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> >>>> +++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> >>> [...]
> >>>> +static int pagemap_scan_pmd_entry(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long start,
> >>>> +                                 unsigned long end, struct mm_walk *walk)
> >>>> +{
> > [...]
> >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> >>>> +       ptl = pmd_trans_huge_lock(pmd, vma);
> >>>> +       if (ptl) {
> >>> [...]
> >>>> +               return ret;
> >>>> +       }
> >>>> +process_smaller_pages:
> >>>> +       if (pmd_trans_unstable(pmd))
> >>>> +               return 0;
> >>>
> >>> Why pmd_trans_unstable() is needed here and not only after split_huge_pmd()?
> >> I'm not entirely sure. But the idea is if THP is unstable, we should
> >> return. As it doesn't seem like after splitting THP can be unstable, we
> >> should not check it. Do you agree with the following?
> >
> > The description of pmd_trans_unstable() [1] seems to indicate that it
> > is needed only after split_huge_pmd().
> >
> > [1] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.3-rc5/source/include/linux/pgtable.h#L1394
> Sorry, yeah pmd_trans_unstable() is need after split. But it is also needed
> in normal case when ptl is NULL to rule out the case if pmd is unstable
> before performing operation on normal pages:
>
> ptl = pmd_trans_huge_lock(pmd, vma);
> if (ptl) {
> ...
> }
> if (pmd_trans_unstable(pmd))
>         return 0;
>
> This file has usage examples of pmd_trans_unstable():
>
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.3-rc5/source/fs/proc/task_mmu.c#L634
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.3-rc5/source/fs/proc/task_mmu.c#L1195
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.3-rc5/source/fs/proc/task_mmu.c#L1543
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.3-rc5/source/fs/proc/task_mmu.c#L1887
>
> So we are good with what we have in this patch.

Shouldn't we signal ACTION_AGAIN then in order to call .pte_hole?

Best Regards
Michał Mirosław